Questions and answers about Taiwan's romanization situation,
and information about why tongyong pinyin is not what it claims to
be

Why not just stick with Wade-Giles?

Taiwan's official system is not now, nor has it ever
been, Wade-Giles.

OK, so Wade-Giles isn't official. But it's still used
more than any other system in Taiwan.

What's usually seen in Taiwan is ... close to
useless.

No, not really. What's usually seen in Taiwan is a
bastardized form of Wade-Giles. The proper use of the apostrophe
(') is essential to Wade-Giles. Because the apostrophe is
almost always omitted, the spellings that result are impossible to
read with certainty. In other words, it's close to useless.

Can you give an example?

Certainly. Let's look at the way 古亭 has been
romanized. The MRT stop is labelled "Kuting." But because the
apostrophes are routinely omitted in Taiwan, it is completely
impossible -- even for the relatively few people who are familiar
with Wade-Giles -- to know if the name is really Ku-ting (Guding
ㄍㄨ ㄉㄧㄥ), K'u-ting (Kuding ㄎㄨ ㄉㄧㄥ), K'u-t'ing (Kuting
ㄎㄨ ㄊㄧㄥ), or Ku-t'ing (Guting ㄍㄨ ㄊㄧㄥ). (Note that hanyu
pinyin, Guting, has no such ambiguity and works well to show the correct
pronunciation.)

That's four equally likely possibilities -- and that's
without considering tones, which are an essential component of
Chinese. If tones are included in the computations, there are 64
different possible pronunciations of the two syllable "Kuting" --
hardly a useful representation of 古亭. Here is a chart of the
possibilities, with tones indicated by numbers and the correct pronunciation marked in
green.

ting1

ting2

ting3

ting4

ding1

ding2

ding3

ding4

ku1

ku1ting1

ku1ting2

ku1ting3

ku1ting4

ku1ding1

ku1ding2

ku1ding3

ku1ding4

ku2

ku2ting1

ku2ting2

ku2ting3

ku2ting4

ku2ding1

ku2ding2

ku2ding3

ku2ding4

ku3

ku3ting1

ku3ting2

ku3ting3

ku3ting4

ku3ding1

ku3ding2

ku3ding3

ku3ding4

ku4

ku4ting1

ku4ting2

ku4ting3

ku4ting4

ku4ding1

ku4ding2

ku4ding3

ku4ding4

gu1

gu1ting1

gu1ting2

gu1ting3

gu1ting4

gu1ding1

gu1ding2

gu1ding3

gu1ding4

gu2

gu2ting1

gu2ting2

gu2ting3

gu2ting4

gu2ding1

gu2ding2

gu2ding3

gu2ding4

gu3

gu3ting1

gu3ting2

gu3ting3

gu3ting4

gu3ding1

gu3ding2

gu3ding3

gu3ding4

gu4

gu4ting1

gu4ting2

gu4ting3

gu4ting4

gu4ding1

gu4ding2

gu4ding3

gu4ding4

Why, oh why does the
government keep giving foreigners the wrong information?

Those who know nothing of tones or of Wade-Giles,
however, will simply say Kuting (ㄎㄨㄊㄧㄥ), which is of course
wrong and does not aid communication. Why, oh why does the
government keep giving foreigners the wrong information? Or is it
just that no one in the government knows how to pronounce
Chinese?

Maybe it's not really wrong -- just the English
pronunciation.

I cannot stress this too much: Other than perhaps
Taipei ㄊㄞ ㄆㄟ for 台北 (hanyu pinyin Taibei ㄊㄞ ㄅㄟ) the only proper
"English" pronunciation of a Chinese name is same as the
Chinese pronunciation. There is no such thing as a proper "English"
pronunciation of Chinese. Everything else brings unnecessary
complications and confusion. The tones needn't always be rendered
to ensure communication, but the vowels and consonants
must.

the only proper
"English" pronunciation of a Chinese name is same as the
Chinese pronunciation.

The whole reason for having a romanization system is
to allow those who cannot read Chinese characters to know the
pronunciation of characters. The purpose of romanization is
communication, plain and simple, not sticking a few
letters from the roman alphabet up on signs because someone thinks
it looks cool, not face (which in any case is not received if the
system is poor or its implementation is botched), and most
certainly not petty nationalism.

To force locals to speak pidgin English and foreigners
to speak mock Chinese to attempt to communicate with each other is
simply ridiculous, esp. when the use of hanyu pinyin can eliminate
most misunderstandings. Actually, Taiwan's approach to this has
been far more than ridiculous; it is patronizing of and offensive
to foreigners.

Tell me some more about the apostrophe in Wade-Giles.
Why is it so important?

The apostrophe is the only thing that allows users to dintinguish between p from b, k from g, ch from j and several others.

For example, the sound most people associate with the letter b is written p in Wade-Giles. The sound of the letter p, on the other hand, is written p'.

There are sound linguistic reasons behind the
Wade-Giles approach. Unfortunately, however, its complete failure
as a popular system is beyond doubt. The approach of t=d, p=b,k=g,
etc., is unnecessarily counter-intuitive and misleading; and it has
led to far too much "English pronunciation."

What about the so-called nick-numbering system, in
which some of Taipei's major roads were given numbers, like in New
York City? Surely that helps foreigners.

I'm willing to believe that whoever came up with the
idea meant well. But the fact remains that it was a bad idea that
should never have been implemented.

Instead of giving foreigners a proper romanization
system that would allow them to know how the street names are
pronounced in Mandarin, thus facilitating communication with
locals, the numbers create yet another layer of confusion. It's a
useless system that neither locals nor foreigners know, much less
use.

Anyone who asks directions to, for example, "Seventh
Boulevard and Twelfth Avenue" is almost certainly going to be met
with incomprehension. (You're an educated person, but do
you know where that is? I doubt it.) Similarly, "Twelve A
and Seven B." Who knows this stuff? No one. Nor is anyone ever
going to bother learning such useless nonsense. What a joke!

But the nick-numbering system is great for people who
take taxis, because now all a foreigner has to do is point on the
nicknumbering map that
taxi drivers have.

First, no matter what the Taipei City Government may
say, most taxi drivers do not have this certain map. But
even for those who do, the numbers don't do much.

Why not?

Because the communication involves pointing at a map.
A map that labels 南京東路 "Seventh Blvd." and 敦化北路 "12th Ave."
does not magically become far superior to a map that labels the
same streets "Nanjing E. Rd." and "Dunhua N. Rd." It is no harder
to point at "Nanjing E. Rd." and "Dunhua N. Rd." than to point at
"12A" and "7B," and it certainly makes a lot more sense.

If a map has a proper romanization system, then
the nick-numbers are redundant. Worse still, they are another
source of possible confusion -- not to mention a big waste of
taxpayers' money. (And don't forget: resident foreigners have to
pay taxes, too!)

Besides, even if people knew the system, it still
works only for major intersections. Anyone who wants to go anywhere
else is out of luck. The nick-numbers have no sections (段), and
therefore cannot be used for addresses. They are, quite
simply, useless.

Well, it doesn't matter which system is used, as long
as it's consistent.

I've often heard that. But it's still nonsense. For
example, I could come up with a system for representing the sounds
of Mandarin by using only icons of the faces of Chen Shui-bian, Ma
Ying-jeou, James Soong, Lien Chan, Kofi Annan, Michael Jackson,
Hello Kitty, Karen Carpenter, the members of Boyzone, etc. It would
thus be both local and international, hooray! It would also have
the virtue of being cute (ke-ai). Surely this would be Taiwan's salvation!
I believe I will call it Ke-Ai Pinyin (可愛拼音). Once we apply it
consistently, the problem will be solved, right? Perhaps I should
go plan my marketing campaign now.

Aw, don't you like my idea? Maybe if I were given a
hefty government grant to study the idea for several years, and
then the opportunity to lobby politicians I could perfect it.

My point is that consistency alone is not an answer.
Even if Taiwan consistently used Ke-Ai Pinyin, if the system
doesn't make sense to those who need it most and it isn't supported by readily available reference materials, it doesn't do any good. It doesn't do much good, either, if the foreigners who are supposed to benefit from it think it's stupid. The situation is the same for tongyong pinyin.

But if it's romanization you want, how about using
Gwoyeu Romatzyh? It's linguistically sound, and was Taiwan's
official system for many years, so there's a precedent.

Gwoyeu Romatzyh? I've never heard of it.

Few people have. The chief recommendation of Gwoyeu
Romatzyh is that it incorporates the tones into the words without
using extra marks. The rules for doing this, however, are more than
a little complicated. Here's how the GIO describes it:

Generally, the first tone is the original form; for
the second tone, an r is inserted after the vowel, or an
i or u becomes a y or w
respectively; for the third tone, the main vowel is doubled, or a
medial i or u becomes an e or o
respectively; and for the fourth, a final h is added in
the case of a single vowel final like a, a final
y or w replaces the i or u in
dipthongs ending in these sounds (like -ai and
-au) respectively, a q replaces the g in
a final -ng, and a final l or n is
doubled. The neutral tone is indicated by a dot before the
word.

An exception to the rules occurs when the initial of a
word is a liquid or a nasal (l, r, m, or
n). Because the words with these initials rarely occur in
the first tone in Mandarin, the original form is used to indicate
the second tone rather than the first tone, and an h is
inserted after the initial to form the first tone.

Have you got all that?

No, not really.

But that's just the beginning. It's actually even
more complicated. Anyway, as the GIO notes, "The difficulties
in popularizing this system are obvious."

If you want consistency, then the MRT largely has this
in its bastardized Wade-Giles. I say "largely" because a few stops
are different: Nanking E. Rd. (using the old Chinese postal system,
instead of the Wade-Giles Nan-ching) and Tamshui (which is
simply wrong).

But Tamshui is the historical Taiwanese name for the
city.

No. Tamsui (no h) is the correct historical spelling,
reflecting the Taiwanese name for the city. Tan-shui would be
correct Wade-Giles, and Danshui correct hanyu pinyin. Of course,
the "Tam-shoo-ee" pronunciation formerly used on the MRT is quite
beneath contempt.

OK, let's get back to why you think consistency -- any
consistency -- isn't enough to solve the problem.

Gladly. As I was saying, the MRT is basically
consistent in using bastardized Wade-Giles. But that's not
particularly useful, because, as I explained earlier with the
example of Kuting station, even those few who know the rules of
Wade-Giles will find it impossible in most cases to know the real
pronunciation of the Mandarin.

OK, so some systems are better than others.
Consistency is necessary but isn't enough by itself. But what's
wrong with using tongyong for Mandarin?

Tongyong can be used for all the languages and
dialects of Taiwan: Mandarin, Taiwanese, Hakka, and the languages
of the aborigine tribes.

How do you know Tongyong can be used for all these
languages and dialects?

Because that's what people say.

What "people say" isn't always reliable. As I've been
showing, Tongyong supporters have made many unsubstantiated,
exagerrated, and misleading claims. Why should this one be any
different? Of all the many people who repeat this universality
claim, how many of them have seen the evidence with their own eyes?
Does it even exist? Where is it? Where is the Tongyong scheme for
Atayal? For Sedeg? For Saisiyat? For Bunun? For Tsou? For
Kanakanabu? For Saaroa? For Paiwan? For Puyuma? For Ami? For Yami?
And for all the other languages and dialects of Taiwan?

Let's see them -- in English as well as Chinese -- and
with clear, scientific, hype-free explanations and examples. Show
how these schemes -- assuming they really exist -- compare to other
systems that have been used for these languages.

all methods of romanizing Chinese are
systems that must be learned to be used properly

Given the exagerrated claims made by Tongyong
supporters, I'm inclined to be skeptical of this, especially
regarding the languages of Taiwan's tribes, which have sounds not
found in any dialect of Chinese.

It cannot be stressed too much that all
methods of romanizing Chinese are systems that must be
learned to be used properly. For a system to succeed on
the popular level (and not just on an academic one) it is desirable
that it should match standard English usage, where possible and
practical. But there is no system, none, that is such
a perfect fit with English that a native speaker of English who
does not know Mandarin can with certainty pronounce properly
without study. Not even the Yale system, which was devised with
American English speakers in mind, is up to the task. This does not
mean that Yale or any other system is therefore "defective" or
"deficient." English and Chinese are completely different
languages. Anyone who expects or demands a perfect, unambiguous fit
between English and pinyin has either not thought about the matter
much or is a fool.

Looked at from a scientific standpoint, the English
alphabet isn't even a good match for English itself. The letters
and combinations of letters are made to carry many, many different
sounds. Take the letter a, for instance. Compare the
a's in ago, gas, ate,
any, all, homage, was, and
father. The sound of the a is different in each
one.

The consonants also change their pronunciations
depending on context. There's the well-known example of how
ghoti can represent fish. (Gh as in
cough, o as in women, and ti as
in friction.)

input methods

What about input methods? Tongyong supporters have
said that their computer input method is the strongest point in
favor of Tonyong pinyin, because q, x, and z don't need to be
typed as often.

This only serves to show how insubstantial the
arguments in favor of Tonyong are, because this point is so weak as
to be laughable.

There are already several methods people can use to
key Chinese characters into a computer. These methods can and do
coexist on individual computers with no trouble or confusion. To
switch a computer from one to another is a simple matter that takes
but a moment. Most people in Taiwan know this for themselves
through personal experience. If you are reading this on a Chinese
Windows system, you probably have one of the following images in
the bottom right corner of your screen.

In order for input methods to be roughly comparable to
the romanization mess, you'd have to imagine something like this.
As you are typing Chinese into your computer, your system randomly
switches input methods every few seconds. To make matters worse,
you would not be warned or even have the new system identified;
you'd be left with little more than trial and error. And as soon as
you finished one character the whole farce would begin again.

To paraphrase the well-known feminist simile: Taiwan's
screwed-up romanization system, street signs, company names, place
names, MRT stations, personal names, etc., etc., ad
nauseum, need a new computer input method like a fish needs a
bicycle. (Or should that be a "ghoti"?)

Tongyong vs. hanyu pinyin is most certainly not a
battle of equals. hanyu pinyin is the one and only international standard
for romanizing Mandarin. It is used by the United Nations, the U.S.
Library of Congress, and countless other institutions
worldwide.

It is now the standard for translation dictionaries
printed everywhere but Taiwan (and even a few here, too). It is the
standard for students of Chinese throughout the world. All
international sinologists know hanyu pinyin. It is supported by a large
number of websites in a variety of languages. There are dozens of
hanyu pinyin dictionaries. It has been used successfully for nearly half
a century. Before its initial adoption it had to demonstrate its
superiority to a huge number of other proposed systems. It is
respected. It is linguistically sound. The foreign community in
Taiwan wants it.

Tongyong, on the other hand, has basically
nothing behind it. Nothing. A few sites give a little
information. Of the few English sites that give the most
information about this supposed godsend of internationalization,
not one is in favor of it -- quite the contrary.

Taiwan culture

I've heard it claimed that anything other than
tongyong will cause Taiwanese culture to be lost.

Baituo! This is an astonishing assertion, and
one I think is demeaning of local culture. What Taiwanese culture
has been preserved in tongyong? What of anything has been
done in tongyong, other than a few batches of error-filled,
confusing street signs written using a now abandoned version of
tongyong.

If Taiwan does not use tongyong to romanize Mandarin,
then Taiwanese culture will be destroyed? What nerve!

learning multiple systems

But if Taiwan uses hanyu pinyin, won't students have to
learn more than one system?

If students need to be able to read romanized
Mandarin, Taiwanese, Hakka, Ami, etc., then, yes, hanyu pinyin
isn't enough and they will need to learn other systems. If
tongyong can really take care of all the other languages accurately
and efficiently (which I very much doubt), good for it.

But since when have students had to learn even one
romanization system? Most locals do not know any system at all.
They usually engage in guesswork. This is the main reason the
street signs, company names, etc., have remained in such a
mess.

But why should elementary school students have to
switch from BoPoMoFo to hanyu pinyin?

This is an unrelated issue. If BoPoMoFo is working
well for Taiwan's students (as it seems to have done), there's no
compelling reason for change. But there can be no doubt that the
mishmosh of romanization systems and additional layer of
misspellings are a complete, embarrassing failure that must be
corrected.

Some people will never accept spelling their names
using a method associated with China.

People should be allowed to romanize their names in
whatever language/dialect they prefer. The supporters of hanyu pinyin
aren't trying to force people to spell their names as someone in
China would. But I do suggest that people who would like their
Mandarin names pronounced correctly by foreigners should use
hanyu pinyin, and not any other system.

Anyway, this is again a rather silly argument, because
it is inevitable that some -- indeed many -- names will be
romanized in exactly the same way in hanyu pinyin and tongyong or
whatever other system.

Let's look at the most common family names in Taiwan: 陳,林,黃,李,張,王,吳,劉,蔡,and 楊. Half of the population of Tawain has one of these 10 names. All but two of them are identical in their hanyu and tongyong spellings.

The opponents of PY often like to say, "Oh,
hanyu pinyin and tongyong are very similar. So it won't be a big problem
to use tongyong, because so much will be the same." But in the next
breath they'll say, "People will never permit their names to have a
hanyu pinyin spelling." Quite simply: You can't have it both
ways.

But maybe that wouldn't happen as much because in
tongyong, words are written differently.

CapITalIzIng The InITial LetTer Of EvErY
SylLaBle Makes ReadIng HardEr, Not EaSiEr.

CapITalIzIng The InITial LetTer Of EvErY SylLaBle
Makes ReadIng HardEr, Not EaSiEr. And It Is ObNoxIous And QuickLy
BeComes TireSome To Read. But If SomeOne InSists On A ComProMise,
Then MayBe This Could Be It: Keep HanYu SpellIng But Use This
StuPid RollEr CoasTer Text ForMat. At Least The Sounds WouldN't Be
As ConFusIng As OthErWise. I've Got To Stop This Now, BeCause I'm
FeelIng SeaSick.

Let's get back to what you said a moment ago. Tongyong
and hanyu pinyin are 85 percent similar. So why the big objection to
tongyong?

Even if they were 95 percent similar, there would
still be a problem. When you change a standard, even just a little,
confusion is the result. And I don't mean confusion just 5 percent
of the time, but confusion most of the time. Also, in this
computerized world, any change whatsoever can render improper
results.

Tongyong and hanyu pinyin are not 85
percent similar!

But I should take this opportunity to point out
something crucial: Tongyong and hanyu pinyin are not 85 percent
similar! This frequently cited figure is, quite simply, bullshit.
At the syllable level, the differences are 19.5 percent, giving
similarities of 80.5 percent, not 85 percent.

And consider that some syllables appear more frequently than others. If we look at syllables from a real-world standpoint, the similarity drops to 72.5 percent.

Moreover, most Chinese words are not monosyllabic, which means they combine syllables and therefore are even less likely to match in different romanization systems. Nearly half (48.84 percent) of Chinese words do not match in hanyu pinyin and tongyong pinyin (source: "Similarities Between Tongyong Pinyin and Hanyu Pinyin"). As the author of the most scientific studies on the topic concludes, "Obviously, there is no reason to say that hanyu pinyin and tongyong pinyin are compatible."

But having its own system will help show that Taiwan has its own identity.

Using tongyong pinyin would be no more useful an expression of national identity than requiring people to wear their underwear on the outside of their clothing.

The "differentness" Taiwan would achieve by adopting tongyong pinyin would be no more beneficial than, for example, deciding that stoplights on the island will no longer be red, yellow, and green like the system used in China (and almost everywhere else), but blue, orange, and pink. No matter how many blue-orange-pink supporters cry "See how wonderfully unique we are!" the rest of the world will still look on this as a ridiculous change from the standard.

Using tongyong pinyin would be no more useful an expression of national identity than requiring people to wear their underwear on the outside of their clothing. Difference for its own sake would make Taiwan look petty and ridiculous. Taiwan does not benefit from looking ridiculous.

But isn't variety the spice of life?

That's a lovely cliche. But it doesn't do anything to address the issue: Taiwan, whether or not most locals realize this, has an enormous problem rooted in its haphazard, slipshod, inconsistent, confusing and even patronizing approach to romanization.

Variety? My God! Taiwan's screwed up romanization has nothing if not variety. Pa-te Rd., Bade Rd., Pateh Rd., Patch(!) Rd., Bader Rd., etc. Besides, the anti-hanyu crowd are the ones who oppose variety. They tout a one-size-fits-all system. (Even though their claim is a lie.)

In short, tongyong pinyin, despite claims to the contrary by its supporters, is:

not compatible with hanyu pinyin

not able to be used with all the languages of Taiwan

not consistent

not easier for foreigners than hanyu pinyin

not stable

not used internationally

not beneficial to international relations but actually harmful to them

not supported by reference materials

not liked or even respected -- indeed, it is despised -- by the community most in need of a good romanization system for Mandarin